Trojan Horse Legislation

Big Brother's medical crew

How
could anyone veto legislation designed to save children unnecessary
pain and the health-care system unnecessary expense? This was the
question asked in a recent Denver Post editorial castigating
Colorado governor Bill Owens for vetoing HB-1023, legislation to
create a statewide registry to track immunizations. All worked up at
the possibility that parents might lose track of immunizations and
that children entering school might have to have extra shots, the
paper claimed that the veto "impedes progress for Colorado children as
well as our public health system."

The statewide immunization registry proposed for Colorado was an
outgrowth of All Kids Count, a national program established by the
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Long a proponent of nationalized
health care, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation helped bankroll
Clinton Care. Following its defeat at the national level, the
Foundation shifted its emphasis to the states. It has successfully
institutionalized its brand of health care in a number of states by
offering direct grants to state executive-branch agencies in exchange
for compliant policy. In Colorado, health bureaucrats have received
more than $4.5 million in grants from Robert Wood Johnson over the
last decade.

These grants amount to private funding for the executive branch of
government — depriving the legislature of its constitutional authority
over executive-branch spending. Indeed, such grants often allow
executive agencies to embark on new programs without even bothering to
tell the legislature. For example, a Robert Wood Johnson grant to the
Boulder Police Department provided funding for ridiculously aggressive
anti-drinking enforcement; students get arrested for just walking
around campus under the influence of alcohol.

At
least a quarter of a million dollars of RWJ money was earmarked for
the immunization-registry program. Nationally, RWJ has spent more than
$20 million dollars on immunization registries since 1991. Colorado
and 22 other states already have programs to track immunizations.
According to the Colorado Department of Health's own figures, 96% of
Colorado children are immunized when they start school. Nationwide, in
1998, there was one probable diphtheria case, and 7,405 cases of
whooping cough. The single case of polio was caused by the oral polio
vaccine.

Given that the existing system works so well, why do we need a new
one? The answer is that what Colorado doesn't have, and what the
proponents of nationalized health care need, is a law letting the
state collect and store individual health information on each of its
citizens. To sneak such legislation past a population that has already
said no to government-controlled health care, its proponents routinely
disguise their proposals as measures designed to help immunize The
Children.

The Colorado legislation would have extended the immunization registry
to include all children under 18, authorized schools to provide
"epidemiological information" to the state, and required that the
state computerize the tracking system. Those marketing the registry
claimed that schools have valuable information on immunization. In
fact, Colorado law requires that students show proof of immunization
before they attend school.

If
schools obey the law, the mere fact that a child is in school
demonstrates that his immunizations are up to date. Although schools
have little information on immunization, they have a lot of
information on other aspects of individual behavior that central
planners would love to get their hands on. In common with those who
have received Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grants in other states,
Colorado's health bureaucrats define health as mental, psychological,
physical, and sociological health. With a definition this broad,
"epidemiological information" includes virtually every detail of a
person's life. Denver school-based "health" clinics created with
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation money already track a student's sexual
habits, whether his family owns a gun, whether his parents get along,
and whether his friends obey the law. The proposed legislation
contained no requirement that the data be destroyed after age 18, and
no provision for opting out. Over time, the practical result would
have been an individual dossier on everyone in the state. If this is
"progress in public health," perhaps impeding it isn't such a bad idea
after all.

Make a donation to support Dave Kopel's work in defense of constitutional
rights and public safety.

Nothing written here is to be construed as
necessarily representing the views of the Independence Institute or as an
attempt to influence any election or legislative action. Please send
comments to Independence Institute, 727 East 16th Ave., Colorado 80203. Phone 303-279-6536. (email) webmngr @ i2i.org